You guys were so helpful with my last scope purchase, well it is time to go through this again. I have a bit more knowledge this time and I should be able to answer the questions easier.
Short Action Customs
Remington 700 trued stainless action
Bartlein 5R M24 Barrel cut to 20” threaded 5/8x24
AI 2.0 folding chassis with tan skins
Timney Calvin elite trigger set at 8 oz
Seekins 20 MOA 1 piece base
600y Maximum weekly
1500y Maximum monthly
Milrad - It is what I have been running on my other two scopes.
A multitude of steel targets, but paper punching will be common. A lot of tannerite.
8" round up to 36" x 36" square, silhouettes
Looking at Horus's but they seem very busy, I kinda like the GAP reticle by USO.
I would like something with more of a easier to read and dial turrets, possible target dials.
Scopes I have been looking at is the
Leupold Mark 5 - Not a fan of the turrets
Vortex Razor 5-20 - Great scope like it but what other options are there.
Vortex Razor HD Gen II 4.5-27x. - Price is not bad, some better features then the Gen 1
US0 B25 - Reviews say they are shit and too long.
Any other suggestions ???
Meopta Optika 6 4.5-27x56 will be out this month, should be very cost effective.
Athalon Ares ETR 4.5-30x56 is probably also worth a look, Cronus BTR if you have more $
Burris XTR3 5.5-30x56This message has been edited. Last edited by: feersum dreadnaught,
NRA Life Member - "Fear God and Dreadnaught"
6.5 CM in a 20 inch barrel to 1500 yards? Ok.
Mid 20X is probably what you're looking for in maximum magnification.
A 20" barrel 6.5CM will perform nicely to some long distances, but 1500 yards isn't one of those distances.
I'll toss out an estimated MV of 2650 with Hornady factory 140 ELD-M. And handloads tuned to specific barrels will likely be in this same ballpark MV. I'll guess a maximum summer DA of 4,000' in the OP's neck of the woods.
JBM predicts Mach .96 at 1500 yards. In my own experience with 140 ELD-M, the bullet will still be flying nose first at this Mach level, but accuracy won't be good. It will take 63 MOA of elevation on the scope to get here, and a 10 mph cross wind will drift the bullet 11.2 MOA.
JBM predicts Mach 1.00 at 1420 yards.
JBM predicts Mach 1.25 at 1110 yards. Realistically, this is likely where the accuracy of the system falls off noticeably. It will take 37 MOA of elevation on the scope to get here, and a 10 mph cross wind will drift the bullet 7.2 MOA.
|At Jacob's Well|
I have the Vortex Razor 5-20 and have been very pleased with it. A Steiner T5 would be in that ballpark as well, but I have no personal experience with it other an looking through the glass.
"But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed." - Isaiah 53:5
Yeah I have no expectations of being able to actually reach out to 1500y, but it is the maximum distance I have access too.
Nightforce has two new NX8 scopes that will soon hit the market.
Their 2.5-20x model should be just under $2k.
Their 4-32x model should be a little over $2k.
I have not touched either one. Preliminary reviews seem to be pretty good.
In your price range suggest to look at the Minox ZP5 5-25 with the MR4 reticle.
Been around this stuff for several years, shooting matches, looked though, played with them all... Optically the Minox is just a smidge below Tangent Theta. Tangent Theta just a smidge below Hendsolt. Nightforce is a few notches below the Minox. The Minox MR4 is a decent reticle, wish they didn't have the milling "L" on it, completely unnecessary. NF is a good bang for the buck, but are lacking with their MIL reticles. I believe they missed the boat with their "christmas tree" reticle. Silly to have the clutter of a 3 mil wind hold at 1 mil of vertical hold. 300yds is 1 mil vertical hold for me, 3 mil of wind hold is 80-90mph. I guess a zombie apocalypse cold break out on my way to a match in Wyoming, need to make a quick no time to dial 300yd shot in 90mph winds! Vortex and Kahles a few notches below NF. Both of these have a considerable amount of chroma aberration compared to the others. If I won a USO, would sell it immediately.
1500yds with a 20" 6.5CM, that's going to be low percentage unless you're shooting at a conex container
So to recap your summation of the scopes you were mentioned
Vortex or Kahles
Any thought on where S&B fall on the list?
Well, that list is a little short-sighted and highly subjective. As I explained in the stickied thread above, riflescopes are all about compromise and it just depends which ones you are willing to accept. The biggest compromise is that has to be portable and still fit on a rifle.
There are few outfits that manufacture optical glass; Schott, Ohara, Nikon (Hikari Glass), Hoya, Corning, Sumita, and a some others. Who makes what for whom is a closely held trade secret and making generalizations regarding provenance is fraught with errors and misdirection. But as you can see there are a couple of areas like Japan with Ohara, Hoya, Nikon, Sumita, and Germany/Austria/Hungary with Schott and others.
The best riflescope companies are currently, in no particular order; Tangent Theta, Hendsolt, March, and Schmidt Und Bender. Price is a great indicator but do remember that one component of price is the actual name on the riflescope. They buy their glass from the glass makers I listed above.
A riflescope is made up of many parts, but even starting with quality parts, the assembly process of a scope is very exacting and the very best scopes are not mass produced; they are assembled by hand, usually by a single highly trained and skilled technician over a period of some hours. I know that Tangent Theta, March and Hendsolt are built in small batches, by hand by very few individuals. I am told the tolerances used in the assembly process are very small. I believe it's also the case for S&B, but I am not 100% sure. These companies do not make a lot of scopes and they don't have a huge number of offerings. So the assembly cost is a large component of the overall cost, especially compared to mass-produced scope.
Some of these outfits are "new" like Tangent Theta, March, Zero Compromise and others. They buy top components and assemble them by hand and thus command a high price. The glass they use is also available to others. Beyond the mix of components, the difference is in the assembly.
That said none of these scopes fit your stated parameter, all of them failing on the price component alone. So yes, look at Nightforce; they make great scopes, that are more affordable.
Optically, smidge above Vortex and Kahles. The S&B's also have chroma aberration issues.
I know March has been around for a while, but making only super-high-end scopes primarily targeted at competition and with little exposure in the US (I know you know this, too). I bought one of the March 3-24x42 FFP scopes back when they were first released and have been very, very pleased with it.
There's been a lot of buzz lately about Tangent Theta, but have been a little hesitant about what seems like a new, unknown company. What's the story with Tangent Theta?
One thing I've never been completely clear on. Let's say I have a scope company and I buy my glass from Schott. Do I specify lens geometry and coatings and whatnot, and Schott does all of that and sends me finished, ready-to-use lenses, or do I buy lens blanks from Schott and find someone else to do lens grinding and coating (or do it myself)? I'm guessing the former?
|Go ahead punk, make my day|
Oh yeah, 'buzz'. All the online gun-rag writers hum about a product but in 12 months you never see them using it again.
I'm wary of new optics companies - I want to spend good money on a solid product, which pretty much rules out any 'Johnny come late-lies'.
Even if they have a Forever Warranty, I don't care. If the company is out of business it's worthless to me.
For for me, for serious optics, I stick with known quantities that have been around awhile.
NightForce, Leupold (although I don't like anything they currently make), Kahles, S&B, etc. Vortex is ok, but expect to send it back eventually.
That pretty much sums up my concern.
When I bought my March, they'd at least been around for 5 years and gotten pretty popular with the Benchrest crowd.
I have two 5-25 Tangents with 4000'ish rds each on them. Great glass, turrets...
Tangent bought out Premier Reticle a couple years back, honored Premiers life time warranty. They could have easily said take a hike Premier customers. Awhile after they bought out Premier had two of my 5-25 Premiers quit tracking. Countless rounds on them, turning the elevation turret for most of those rounds. Tangent was not making anymore parts for Premier scopes. They traded me the two broken scopes I had bought used 5-6yrs prior for one new Tangent 5-25. I was more then OK with that. When I received the Tangent still had two other Premiers 5-25 and 3-15. The Tangent is step up in optic quality.
Let's talk about "chroma aberration." This is shorthand for "chromatic aberration." Right, still clear as mud or, what does that mean to me?
Visible light is made up of multiple colors which are at different wavelength, ranging from 400 to 700 nanometers (nm). When light is refracted through a convex lens (such as the objective lens on a riflescope, these wavelengths will focus at different distances from the ideal focal plane. The shorter wavelengths will focus in front of the ideal focal plane and the longer wavelength will focus behind it. The chromatic aberration is more pronounced as you get further away from the middle of the lens, which is why you read about chromatic aberration being discernible around the edges of the image.
So, what does CA (chromatic aberration) do to the picture? Well, since the colors of a single object are focusing at slightly different planes, the image loses crispness and we get what is called color fringing. For me, looking at a target with extremely well defined patterns of black and white (tan), the printed rings on the target are not sharp, there seems to be hair on the rings, when CA is not well controlled. In other scenarios, the image just seems to lack crispness and doesn't exactly pop.
There are various ways to control CA, but the very best way is by using ED, Super ED or best of all, fluorite glass. The latter is VERY expensive and fluorite glass in very fragile to the elements compared to regular or ED, Super ED glass. As such, we do have camera lenses with fluorite glass elements, but I know of only one riflescope that has fluorite glass, and the price is eye watering. I'm not even sure it's in production any more.
This is why I always harp about ED and Super ED glass in your high end riflescope. While it's not quite fluorite, it comes very close to it and it's a lot stronger and cheaper, albeit still much more expensive than regular glass.
ED (Extra low Dispersion) glass was invented by Nikon in the late 1960s, early 1970 and they more recently came up with Super ED glass that comes closer to fluorite glass for CA control. I suspect there are other glass makers to produce a similar product, but not everyone makes ED or similar glass.
My March-X 5-50X56 has ED glass and the CA is very well controlled. The fun thing with a riflescope is that we are much more concerned with the middle of the picture, or wherever the inner tube is pointing to, but camera users are concerned about the entire picture area. Of course, in PP we can eliminate CA for pictures so the need for CA-control is much less in cameras compared to what it used to be. On the other hand, we don't do PP on riflescope views, so we need CA control on those scope.
I must profess total ignorance on that aspect. It's difficult to get much information unless and until you are in that business and ready to order. I should think that with current manufacturing technology, you can order pretty much what you think you want, but I would think that most everything that is available to one buyer would be available to others unless you put in something proprietary. Think of it as people who built laptops. They all buy the CPUs (lenses) and other components from a few vendors, but they spec them out and assemble them differently.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2|